| name | write-prose |
| description | ALWAYS invoke this skill when writing reader-facing documents such as public docs, web pages, and product messages for outside readers like developers and customers. NEVER invoke for chat responses to the user (no matter how long), operational prose like code comments, commit messages, or agent-facing instructions like SKILL.md. |
Invoke the prose:prose-standards skill before proceeding. If that skill is unavailable, report the missing skill and continue with the closest available workflow.
Reader-facing prose that reads as varied, specific, and human.
<quick_start>
Use common verbs. Vary sentence openings. One rhetorical move per paragraph. Say it once well. Length matches substance. Zero tolerance for patterns in /prose-standards -- never use any of them, not even once.
</quick_start>
<word_choice>
Use common verbs. Is, has, does, makes, runs, shows. When a simpler verb says the same thing, use it. "The library is the city's main archive" over any construction that dresses up "is" in formalwear.
Adverbs earn their place by adding real information. "The server responded in 14ms" is precise. An adverb that exists only to make something sound more meaningful than you've demonstrated it to be is dead weight. Cut it. In particular, when a sentence demonstrates a quality through its content, it does not need an adverb to assert that same quality. "Users who delete their account cannot recover it" shows irreversibility; adding "truly" or "actually" claims what the sentence already proves.
Use the plainest accurate noun when describing a field, area, or collection of things: field, area, market, industry, set. The concrete noun that names the actual thing is almost always better than a metaphorical one.
Use words that were normal before 2023. If a word feels like it belongs in a thesaurus entry for a common word, use the common word. Use over synonyms for use. Study over synonyms for study. Strong over synonyms for strong. Important over synonyms for important -- or better, show the importance through specifics rather than asserting it with any adjective at all.
</word_choice>
<sentence_structure>
One rhetorical move per paragraph. If a sentence makes a point, the next sentence can develop it, support it, or transition to the next point. It should not restate the same point as a reframe.
State things directly. "The API lacks scoped permissions" is a complete thought. It does not need to be set up as a correction of what the reader supposedly believed. Say what is true. If there's a specific misconception worth addressing, name it specifically and cite where it comes from.
A definition earns its keep when the predicate adds information the subject does not already contain. "An irreversible change does not revert" restates the adjective as a predicate. State the test directly and drop the adjective: "The change does not revert."
Questions in prose should be real questions -- ones where the answer is non-obvious, or where the writer is exploring without a predetermined answer. A question whose answer appears in the next five words is a speed bump.
Vary your sentence openings. If three consecutive sentences start the same way, rethink two of them. Parallel structure is a tool for emphasis at the moment of a specific rhetorical payoff, not a default mode.
Groups of items have the size the content demands. Sometimes two. Sometimes five. The number comes from how many significant things there actually are, not from a preference for any particular count.
Transitions connect ideas, not slots. A new paragraph that follows logically from the previous one often needs no transition at all. When one is needed, it should name the actual relationship: cause, contrast, sequence, example. A transition word that could be deleted without losing meaning should be deleted.
Participial phrases at sentence endings should add new information. "The bridge opened in 1998, connecting the east and west banks for the first time" -- the participial phrase tells you something the main clause didn't. If removing the phrase loses nothing, remove it.
"From X to Y" implies a fully continuous spectrum. Use it only when there's a meaningful continuum with a middle that matters to the point. When listing two or more loosely related things, just list them.
Build toward your point directly. Never negate before stating what something is: "Not unkind -- direct" and "It's not X -- it's Y" are machine-writing tells. State what the thing is. If asserting significance ("There's a difference, and it matters"), cut it -- the content should demonstrate the difference without the author vouching for it.
Every sentence needs a subject and a verb. After making a claim, resist illustrating it with a trail of verbless fragments. If examples are worth giving, put them in complete sentences.
</sentence_structure>
<paragraph_structure>
Paragraphs develop thoughts. A one-sentence paragraph is appropriate when a single sentence constitutes a complete, weighty unit. Multiple consecutive one-sentence paragraphs signal that thought hasn't been developed -- just segmented for manufactured rhythm.
Arguments are prose, not numbered lists in disguise. If the structure of an argument is "first point, second point, third point," write it as prose with real connective tissue between the points -- shared context, logical progression, qualifications. Labeling three paragraphs with ordinal numbers is still a list.
</paragraph_structure>
Write at the reader's level. If the audience is technical, assume technical literacy. Analogies and simplifications are useful when the source domain is unfamiliar to the audience. If the concept is simpler than the analogy, skip the analogy. Do not instruct the reader to imagine or visualize; just describe the thing.
Begin where the content begins. The first sentence of a piece or section should deliver substance. It does not need a warm-up phrase promising that what follows will be interesting.
Suspense requires actual surprise. A sentence that promises a revelation should deliver information that recontextualizes what came before. If the next sentence would land exactly the same without the buildup, the buildup is empty.
Scope claims to what you can show. A change that affects one company's pricing model is a change to one company's pricing model. Describe the actual measured or documented impact. The reader will assess significance.
Vulnerability is specific. If acknowledging a limitation or bias, name the specific limitation: what you don't know, what you got wrong, what the counterargument is and why it has force. A vague gesture toward self-awareness reads as performance rather than accountability.
Demonstrate rather than assert. If the evidence is clear, presenting it will make that apparent. If the argument is simple, its brevity will show that. Claiming clarity or simplicity is a substitute for achieving it.
Name your sources. "Elena Marchetti's 2023 analysis found..." is credible. Unnamed experts, unnamed observers, unnamed reports are not sources. If you can't name the source, rewrite the sentence to stand on its own evidence. Represent the number of sources accurately -- one person's view is one person's view.
Use terms that already exist. When grouping a phenomenon, check whether an established term covers it before coining a compound label. If no term exists, describe the phenomenon in plain language rather than branding it with an invented two-word name.
Punctuation names the relationship between clauses. A colon introduces what follows: a definition, an elaboration, a list. A semicolon joins independent clauses that are parallel or closely related. Commas set off a phrase that qualifies but could be removed. A period ends one thought and starts the next. When uncertain how two clauses relate, a period and a new sentence is almost always the right choice.
Sentence structure and word choice create emphasis, not typeface. Bold the subject of an article on first mention if convention calls for it. Beyond that, let the words do the work.
Lists use plain text items. Each item starts with its content. If each item needs a label, consider whether a table or a set of subsections is the better structure.
Use the characters your keyboard produces. Straight quotes, plain hyphens, standard arrows in code (->, =>). Typographic niceties belong to the rendering layer, not the source text.
Say it once well. A point made clearly in one place does not need to be previewed in the introduction, echoed in the body, and restated at the end. If the piece is short enough that the reader remembers the beginning when they reach the end, a summary wastes their time.
Metaphors serve a single moment. Introduce a comparison, use it to illuminate the immediate point, and release it. Returning to the same metaphor three paragraphs later asks it to bear more weight than it can.
Examples are specific, not stacked. One well-chosen example with real detail is more convincing than four examples rattled off with a sentence each. If multiple examples add different information, develop each one. Rapid-fire lists of historical companies or precedents substitute name-dropping for analysis.
Within a sentence, one concrete example is stronger than one concrete paired with one generic. If a second example does not add a distinct image or cover a different case, it dilutes the first.
A piece ends when the last new idea is complete. The reader can tell.
Acknowledge real tradeoffs in place. When a subject has real difficulties, describe them in the section where they're relevant, with the same specificity and sourcing as any other claim. Difficulties are part of the subject, not a bookend ritual.
Length matches substance. A piece with one core insight is short. A piece with a complex argument and multiple lines of evidence is long. Word count tracks the amount of new information and reasoning, not the importance of the thesis. If a draft restates its core point more than twice, it is too long.
Track what you've already written. Before writing a new paragraph, hold in mind what the previous paragraphs have established. Each paragraph should move the piece forward. If a new paragraph could be swapped with an earlier one without the reader noticing, one of them is redundant.
<success_criteria>
Prose is good when:
- Verbs are common and precise
- Adverbs add real information, not emphasis
- Sentence openings vary
- Each paragraph develops a thought, not just segments one
- Claims are scoped to what the text demonstrates
- Sources are named or the sentence stands on its own evidence
- Metaphors appear once and move on
- The piece ends without announcing its ending
- Length matches the amount of new information
- Zero instances of any pattern from
/prose-standards -- no negative parallelism, no authenticity adverbs, no asserting significance, none of them
</success_criteria>
